• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Primary Cementing
  • Remedial Cementing
  • Plug Cementing
  • Job Execution
  • Post-job results interpretation
  • Equipment
  • Laboratory
  • Mission
  • About
  • Contact and Questions?
  • My Cementing Challenges

Better Well Cementing for ALL

The Leading Online Support Hub for Better Oil Well Cementing.

Cement Retarders: Synthetic Vs. Organic

July 5, 2017 By Lenin Diaz 4 Comments

Cement Retarders: Synthetic Vs. Organic

In my experience, bio-based oil well cement retarders do not provide the consistency needed to control thickening time accurately. (This is at least, the case among types of cement used in oil wells). The main reason is that the production of natural organic retarders varies from lot to lot and batch to batch.

The problem with organic retarders

Down-hole conditions, process control and small variations in cement quality; all play a significant part in the inconsistencies of natural organic retarders and other biopolymers used in the industry. Those such as the cellulose derivative, hydroxyethylcellulose, used as a common fluid loss additive in oil well cementing, experience the same pitfalls as other biopolymers within the oil and gas industry.

We can take a look at an organic molecule and a synthetic polymer. These are both used to control thickening time of the cement slurry. We can easily see why it is the much safer and best choice to opt for a synthetic product.

Thickening time, however, also depends on the:

  • Job conditions
  • The validity of the BHST
  • The determination of the BHCT
  • The mix water preparation
  • Density control
  • Plus other operational aspects.

This analysis is the role of the service company. If we take aside the necessary design and operational controls, it is clear that the first step to making consistent and predictable cement slurry is to treat it with synthetic additives.

Encouraging results from a synthetic retarder trial

Recently, I came across a system that claims to provide excellent results. Even more importantly, reproducibility in thickening within a very, very low standard deviation. This is an excellent advantage to lower costs, laboratory time (e.g., equipment usage) and increases the service quality we deliver to our costumers. Well control, zonal isolation and well integrity are all positivity affected. This maximizes well security and operational safety.

This synthetic retarder provides reproducible results, increases safety through additive engineering. This, in turn, offers predictable results based on the system’s designed linearity.

The system offers excellent fluid loss data, thickening time results, rheology, strength retrogression, expandability. It is cost effective and rigid. It has thermal stability and can perform in HPHT conditions (temperatures as high as 450 F), as well as in temperatures as low as 100 F. The linear response makes this state of the art and a safe-to-use oil well cement system.

After probably only a few years in the industry, we all know well that biopolymer-based systems commonly used have entirely too much variance and other side effects. Sure, they work, but there is no real predictability. That can be very difficult for our laboratory guys with obvious implications in service quality.

Here I will introduce a simple truth, we all know:

The more time the slurry spends in the lab, the higher the risk for the well

Risk elevation can be dangerous and costly to operators.

We derive biopolymers in a naturally organic way, and their quality may vary significantly from lot to lot. Variation in quality makes inventory control more difficult for services companies. This is in addition to the issues already mentioned, all with tremendous effect on service quality.

On the contrary, synthetic cement retarders will provide accuracy time after time. This synthetic product, like any other, is man-made, so the reaction environment is controlled, and it does not change. It’s purely linear, so if you want 2hrs, you can treat with 0.02gal/sks.  If you want 3 hrs, you can treat with 0.03gal/sks, for instance.

For inquiries about these cement retarders, and how you can obtain samples and brochures, send email to lenin.diaz@better-cementing-for-all.org

Cheers

L. Diaz

Related posts:

  1. Cement Slurry design Basics
  2. Workover Cementing Techniques 2: Squeeze Cementing
  3. Cement, Spacer, all there. But where’s the wiper plug?
  4. Cement gelation: Come on! move it! push it! … Too late, it’s gelled up! …

Filed Under: General Tagged With: biobased, retarder, synthetic

Article Posted By:

Lenin Diaz is an oil industry specialist with 26 years of technical and operational expertise in fluids, cementing, water control and shut-off. A distinguished track record spanning BP, Schlumberger, and NAPESCO. Lenin lives in Tenerife, Spain and is the creator of this website. Read More…

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Jeff Long says

    July 12, 2017 at 5:05 pm

    Mr. Diaz,

    I respectfully disagree that the synthetic retarders are the go to choice. I have not found them to be as predictable as you have suggested (with lab time savings etc.).
    Yes, in certain instances they do provide a somewhat linear response, but only in the situation that nothing has changed i.e; the same cement, same additives, and same general well conditions.
    Many synthetics in fact, seem to respond in a linear fashion related more pressure as opposed to temperature, which can be very beneficial.

    But I have not found them to significantly save lab time until reaching mid-temperature (+/- 165°F BHCT).

    The selection of synthetic retarder for higher temperatures can be argued on volume, and effectiveness as well as predictability. Synthetics become more cost/execution effective as the BHCT increases, and the volume of a Biopolymer is significantly increased.

    In comparison, I have found Biopolymers can also have sufficient predictability in the right situation, some of them even in the mid to high temp range, at lower pressures, can provide a more competitive choice in both effectiveness and cost, without sacrificing predictability or repeatability.

    This all goes back to the theories on the mechanism of action for retarders, and what is going to be the most effective in a given situation. The better we can understand our cement properties, the better our retarder selection will be. Of course, that only comes with lab time… unfortunately.

    I like the discussion.
    Thanks,
    Jeff

    Reply
    • Lenin Diaz says

      July 13, 2017 at 1:03 am

      Indeed Jeff, this is a good point you are making. I am not trying to simplify things out; designing a cement slurry, even for similar wells, would always have some degree of “uncertainty”. And it has to do with the cement batch, temperaure and other things.
      However, It is very interesting you mention the linearity related to pressure and not temperature. Maybe if you have the time, you can tell us a bit more here, that would be great. Thanks

      Reply
  2. Kedar Sapte says

    July 19, 2017 at 11:52 am

    Hello Lenin,

    Nice topic. I have observed that the retarders are highly active in a specific temperature range. For synthetic retarders, it is +/- 170 to +/- 250 F. Within this temperature range, the retarder exhibit non-linear performance. This can be observed with the natural retarders as well. Though I agree with you on batch-to-batch variation in performance, there is also a variation within samples of the same batch (perhaps due to the blending process or storage). And such variations would magnify if the additive is liquid and is stored in large containers (of size of tote tanks or larger) and if no proper equipment available on field to homogenize the contents in such tanks. Significant variations can be observed between the tests conducted with the lab samples of retarder and those with the samples from field.

    So, with all due respect, if someone claims that the system is giving reproducible results, it is worth checking the conditions. Because, the tests conducted under meticulously controlled environments always produce reproducible results as some of the variation causing parameters are always eliminated under such controlled environment.

    Thanks,

    Kedar

    Reply
    • Lenin Diaz says

      July 19, 2017 at 1:17 pm

      Thanks Kedar. Well said. Certainly reproducibility, in this context, would depend on a variety of conditions and situations.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Trango DEPM is a team of Oil&Gas professionals with broad experience in the O&G industry. Working on onshore and offshore projects around the world, including most vivid and challenging areas as Saudi Arabia, US Marcellus shale and North Sea, but also small on small projects, requiring individual approach, we are well equipped to help you plan, budget, implement and execute your drilling project successfully. We also cooperate with number of other professionals with experience in such areas as drilling, geology, geophysics, procurement or logistics. This allows us to fully run your project or just support you in desired areas of expertise, depends on you needs.

How I survived the 2016 Downturn and the current difficult times?

Find the content you need

Archives

24 Page Free Primary Cementing Guide

Click this image to take a look. It is comprehensive and easy to follow too!

In 2016, I launched Better Cementing for All. Now, I want to keep it alive.

For more than 26 years, I have worked in oil well cementing, offering my services to some of the largest oil corporations in the world and committing myself to excellence. I have mastered my role, and in doing so, I have accrued a skill set that is extremely valuable to my fellow professionals. Eager to do whatever I can to help them, I have owned and operated Better Cementing for All since 2016.
Let me tell you what Better Cementing for All does and what it means. A resource for all oil industry professionals and for cementers both established and prospective, this is a non-profit resource that I established in order to do nothing but serve and make an impact on people who are looking to build careers for themselves in cementing.
From primary cementing to remedial cementing to plug cementing to post-job results, I do it all, and I am comfortable answering in-depth questions about each and every one of these topics. I also offer tools and tips for jobseekers, general self-development advice, and guidance for equipment choices. TO put it simply, this is the go-to spot for anyone who wants to know anything about oil well cementing.
The problem, however, is that covid-19 has made the structure of the website seem untenable. I am trying to juggle the work that I do and my non-profit initiatives and finding it all unhealthy and unsustainable. I want to keep Better Cementing for All up and running, but to do that, I need your help.


My NEW introductory VIDEO

Recent Posts

Max Out Your Cement Coverage

If we consider the main variables to ensure proper mud in hole replacement with cement: stand-off, … [Read More...] about Max Out Your Cement Coverage

Cementing Flowchart

In recent weeks, I received some reader requests to include cement job processes or procedures as … [Read More...] about Cementing Flowchart

Cementing. Challenges across permeable zones

This article will provide you with some actionable suggestions for cementing across permeable zones. … [Read More...] about Cementing. Challenges across permeable zones

Forensic Cementing

Forensic is a term usually associated with crimes. Criminal forensics is the use of science to … [Read More...] about Forensic Cementing

Cement Slurry design Basics

First, here is a handy table to simplify the process of cement slurry design: Additive … [Read More...] about Cement Slurry design Basics

well cementing pre-job cement challenge question

Remedial Cementing with Coiled Tubing (animation)

Though I am far from being an animation expert, during my training courses I have always wanted to … [Read More...] about Remedial Cementing with Coiled Tubing (animation)

Need urgent help?

WhatsApp me at this number: +34 657 07 01 78

Footer

Recent activity

Visit our latest posts and help others by adding a comment.

Make your contribution and help keep Better Cementing for All alive!

Now more than ever, we are facing a loss of expertise in our industry, and Better Cementing for All is a unifying force, featuring interactions among industry professionals, knowledge sharing through posts, and other valuable pieces of content that we need to preserve.

Recent Comments

  • Merit on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on All you need to know about Bentonite in Cement Slurries
  • Lenin Diaz on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on Suicide Squeeze Cementing: risky but valid
  • Samuel Bekele Bedjiga on All you need to know about Bentonite in Cement Slurries

Recent Posts

  • Max Out Your Cement Coverage
  • Cementing Flowchart
  • Cementing. Challenges across permeable zones
  • Forensic Cementing
  • Cement Slurry design Basics
  • Remedial Cementing with Coiled Tubing (animation)
  • Plug and Abandonment Webinar (Español)
  • Webinar series (II). Quality Assurance in Cementing Operations (Spanish)
  • Webinar series (I). Log interpretation (Spanish)

Submit your email

&middot Better Well Cementing For All is owned by L. Diaz © 2023 &middot TOS & Privacy Policy &middot Web Design &middot